Research Paper On Privacy Vs Security

The Founding Father envisioned America to be a nation where the people were able to walk on a land of freedom. After the road to victory from the American Revolution, the Founding Fathers set up a government that was formed to protect the rights of the citizens after their treatment with British Monarchy. Contrast to the British Parliament that declined the voice of the people; the Founding Fathers intended for the people to have their voice heard and not to be oppressed. In addition, the Founders Fathers intended for American citizens to trust and rely on their government, and live in a society where their rights were not being compromise. However, in recent times, the government has passed multiple laws that disregard and violate our right of privacy. The Federal government is obligated to protect privacy as an individual right as shown through Supreme Court cases, the Bill of Rights, and the liberty clause within the fourteenth amendment.

Privacy is, and should continue to be, a fundamental dimension of living in a free, democratic society. Laws protect “government, credit, communications, education, bank, cable, video, motor vehicle, health, telecommunications, children’s and financial information; generally carve out exceptions for disclosure of personal information; and authorize the use of warrants, subpoenas, and court orders to obtain the information.” (Protecting Individual Privacy in the Struggle Against Terrorists: A Framework for Program Assessment, 2008) This is where a lot of people feel as though they have their privacy violated. Most Americans are law-abiding citizens who do not commit illegal acts against the country, they want to go about their lives, minding their own business and not having to worry about outside interference. The fine line between privacy and National Security may not be so fine in everyone’s mind. While it is the job of government agencies to ensure the overall safety of the country and those living in it, the citizens that obey the law and do not do anything illegal often wonder why they are subject to any kind of search, when they can clearly point out, through documentation, that they have never done anything wrong.

During the past decade, an issue has arisen from the minds of people, on which is more important? Privacy or national security? The problem with the privacy is that people do not feel they have enough of it and national security is increasing causing the government to be less worried about the people. National security is growing out of control which has led to the decrease in people’s privacy and has created fear in the eyes of U.S. citizens. “Twelve years after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and amid a summer of revelations about the extent of the surveillance state built up to prevent others, leaders, experts and average Americans alike are searching for the right balance between security and privacy” (Noble). Americans should be able to live their daily lives without fear of an overpowered government or a “big brother” figure taking over. “According to a CBS News poll released Tuesday evening, nearly 6 in 10 Americans said they disapproved of the federal government’s collecting phone records of ordinary Americans in order to reduce terrorism” (Gonchar). While it is good to keep our country safe with security, American’s privacy should be more important because there is a substantial amount of national security, the people 's rights should matter first.

The personal rights that lead to a good life are important but the most important right is the right to privacy. People have been talking for years about the right of privacy. The use of computers made access to Americans personal data very easy. The government knowledge about people’s privacy and personal information can be a benefit to Americans but it also can lead to a serious damage. From the bright side, knowing these information makes it easier to pass social security checks, making medical

“As the foregoing has made clear, personal information is an extension of the person. To have access to that information is to have access to the person in a particularly intimate way,” (McFarland). When the government takes a person’s private information to use for insensitive matters, they dehumanize the human, and strip a human of their rights to individuality and expression, going against the American way. When the government has the ability to spy on our lives they obtain greater advantage above us regular people. If we are not careful, and accept the government’s hold upon us as a norm, we will never be able to define ourselves as freedom thinkers, and humans with liberty and full rights to

Privacy is what allows people to feel secure in their surroundings. With privacy, one is allowed to withhold or distribute the information they want by choice, but the ability to have that choice is being violated in today’s society. Benjamin Franklin once said, “He who sacrifices freedom or liberty will eventually have neither.” And that’s the unfortunate truth that is and has occurred in recent years. Privacy, especially in such a fast paced moving world, is extremely vital yet is extremely violated, as recently discovered the NSA has been spying on U.S. citizens for quite a while now; based on the Fourth Amendment, the risk of leaked and distorted individual information, as well as vulnerability to lack of anonymity.

According to the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Yet, in the United States at this very moment, the government is collecting information on everyone who makes a call, sends an email, plays a video game, or even owns a computer. They are in people’s houses without actually having to be there. This collection of information is unlawful, and unconstitutional, violating exactly what the government

The common thread throughout all four arguments for civil liberties—historical backing, refined legality, obligatory morality, and economic responsibility—is that each is personal to citizens. The Fourth Amendment was written for American citizens. The laws enforced in this nation are for the people’s safety. The social contract is in place to balance the relationship between government and society. And the government security agencies are funded by the citizens through taxes. The initial two questions were “is government collection of personal data under the argument of national security just, and, if not, what would be an alternative to protecting American citizens?” The resolving answer is that the collection of data is unprotected, immoral,

In 1787, the constitution was born. The constitution has been America’s guideline to the American way of life. Our US constitution has many points in it to protect America and it’s people from an overpowered government, our economy, and ourselves. The only thing the constitution doesn’t directly give us, is our right to privacy, and our right to privacy has been a big concern lately courtesy of the National Security Agency (NSA).(#7) Although our constitution doesn’t necessarily cover the privacy topic, it does suggest that privacy is a given right. Some people say that the right to privacy was so obvious, that our founding fathers didn’t even feel the need to make a point about it.(#9) It also didn’t help

America has long been hailed as “The Land of Opportunity”. The nation has drawn refugees and immigrants from all over for more than two hundred years. However, as our country has expanded and the population diversified, we are facing more issues than ever before. From Women’s rights to voting rights and issues regarding National Security, the government and the people are rarely in agreement. One issue that has been heavily debated is the people’s right to privacy. This issue in particular brings forth a whole host of questions. Is privacy actually a “right” as defined in the constitution? Or can the government pervade its people’s private lives as it so pleases? Should the government have easy access to everything about you, such to

Imagine someone living in a country that turns surveillance equipment on its own citizens to monitor their locations, behavior, and phone calls. Probably no one is willing to live in such place where privacy is being undermined by the authorities. For people living in the U.S., their private information has been more vulnerable than ever before because the government is able to use various kinds of surveillance equipment and technology to monitor and analyze their activities, conversations, and behaviors without their permission, in the name of homeland security. Mass surveillance has jeopardized people’s privacy and deprived individuals of their freedom, which is associated with dignity, trust, and autonomy. In the

The rights of the people in America should not be infringed upon because these rights are guaranteed. And if abused, it not only infringes the rights of the people, but also diminishes the moral code of citizens of the United States. Furthermore, the civil rights that have protected people from the government now seem like they are being taken away from the government itself. The government has given itself the privilege to tap our phones, read and scan emails, access bank accounts, invade homes, and detain someone indefinitely. All of this is happening without any prior legal courses of action or our knowledge. This right to privacy, a fundamental liberty that is implied by the fourth amendment in the U.S. constitution, continues to be infringed upon by the government.

Ever since day one, people have been developing and creating all sorts of new methods and machines to help better everyday life in one way or another. Who can forget the invention of the ever-wondrous telephone? And we can’t forget how innovative and life-changing computers have been. However, while all machines have their positive uses, there can also be many negatives depending on how one uses said machines, wiretapping in on phone conversations, using spyware to quietly survey every keystroke and click one makes, and many other methods of unwanted snooping have arisen. As a result, laws have been made to make sure these negative uses are not taken advantage of by anyone. But because of how often technology changes, how can it be

Many people can’t seem to agree on whether or not they should have more privacy or loses some privacy, and be more supervised. In both articles, each author is trying to inform the readers and state the possible consequences of having too much privacy or not enough supervision. In the article “The Eternal Value of Privacy” by Bruce Schneier and the article “In the battle between privacy and security, security always wins” by Chris Cillizza you will see which article has the best logical argument on whether or not, the privacy article or the surveillance article was best stated .

If you ask me ID chips have way more negatives than positives. Because all hackers have to do is use the right equipment and there in. Also as Senator Joe Simitian said “It’s an educational equivalent to an ankle bracelet”. And ID chips take away all privacy. As Michele Tatro said “We could not just let our children be tagged like cans or cattle”. This takes the child’s privacy. But on the other side eye scanners are kind of ok because they keep potential kidnappers out. A con of eye scanners is you have to register. But a pro is it is more accurate than finger which is amazing. But it also might hurt your eyes. In a study 1 out of 3 people got eye cancer from these scanners found at Harvard University. Not only is this bad enough but it is